Seat Toledo 1994 vs Ford Scorpio 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 180 NM | 171 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Seat Toledo is more dynamic to drive. Seat Toledo engine produces 30 HP more power than Ford Scorpio, whereas torque is 9 NM more than Ford Scorpio. Thanks to more power Seat Toledo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Toledo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Seat Toledo consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Scorpio, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Seat Toledo could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Seat Toledo consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Scorpio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 640 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Scorpio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Seat Toledo) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Scorpio) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
| Seat Toledo 1994 2.0 engine: A reliable engine with a great lifespan, the most common problems are caused by electronics. The engine rarely needs to be repaired, but if it does, it can be expensive as the engine parts are original and ... More about Seat Toledo 1994 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Seat Toledo is smaller. Seat Toledo is 35 cm shorter than the Ford Scorpio, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Seat Toledo is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Toledo is 0.1 metres more than that of the Ford Scorpio. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Ford Scorpio has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Toledo has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Ford Scorpio, so Ford Scorpio quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 400 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Toledo has
|
Ford Scorpio has
| |